User talk:Natuur12


File:Tösstaler Frauentracht (Mitte 20. Jh.) im Ortsmuseum Wila.JPGEdit

Hi Natuur12... Happy New Year! I hope you are well. Could you please take a look at the above? In the deletion log, you stated "Per Commons:Deletion requests/File:Pracownicy RZI Szczecin podczas uroczystosci.jpg" -- but that seems to be the DR for a different file. I can't find a DR for File:Tösstaler Frauentracht (Mitte 20. Jh.) im Ortsmuseum Wila.JPG, indeed there are no inbound links at all (apart of course from the one I'm just creating). I ask because there is a ticket concerning this file at ticket:2015112610022638. Thanks, Storkk (talk) 12:02, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

Hi, happy new year! It seems to be a different picture. Not sure how this happened (and it was never nominated for deletion) but the main problem is that it is the photograph of a "sculpture" and I rather doubt that this is covered by some kind of FOP-provision since it is neither permanent situated nor is it sure if FOP applies to museum's. Likely some leftover from this mess. This DR includes some files from the same source. Natuur12 (talk) 12:10, 7 January 2016 (UTC)
Thanks... I'll leave a note on the ticket and then leave it for a Commons admin who can see the photo and describe the situation better to reply to. All the best, Storkk (talk) 16:10, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

File:Insignia Hungary Political Party KDNP.svgEdit

Hello,

This is to notify you that I am renominating the file File:Insignia Hungary Political Party KDNP.svg for deletion. I believe you made an erroneous decision when you closed the previous debate with a "Kept." The image quite plainly goes beyond the threshold of originality, and the only argument in favor of keeping it ("Heraldic work that has other appropriate licensing") is demonstrably false: there is no license whatsoever attached to the file. I trust that the second time around the correct decision (deletion) will be reached.

Best,

--Malatinszky (talk) 00:32, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

Hi, why do you think that this file isn't the uploaders own work as he/she stated? There is a license, please check the license section. When doubting the "own work" claim off a an experienced collegue who donated plenty of heraldic files it takes a little bit more than "above TOO" or "there is no license". For example, is it a exact copy of the original or used he/she copyrighted elements? Natuur12 (talk) 00:49, 8 January 2016 (UTC)
Maybe we should discuss this at the deletion request page itself, for the benefit of others who might have an opinion. --Malatinszky (talk) 01:03, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Marsz Młodzieży Narodowej w Częstochowie. Marzec 2015.jpgEdit

The request was closed as kept. Amitie said, that no source was provided for suspected copyvio. Actually this was false. Túrelio showed it in "other versions" part of infobox, it was published in August 2014 and the photographer was Witold Dobrowolski. The file was uploaded into Commons in November 2015. Why did you kept the file? Taivo (talk) 12:23, 9 January 2016 (UTC)

Hi,
This seems to be an error. I trusted that the statement provided by Amitie was legit. I will reclose the DR as delete. Natuur12 (talk) 15:52, 9 January 2016 (UTC)

Request for closure reviewEdit

Hi Natuur12!! Re: Commons:Deletion requests/File:ESCUDODEAYUTLA.png, since the work is labeled "Escudo de Armas creado por el Prof. Domingo Salvador Guitron" and has no source, please review? Cheers! Ellin Beltz (talk) 16:17, 9 January 2016 (UTC)

Hi, this is a reason to delete. I will delete it. However, having "own work" as a source and possibly being made by a non notable artist is not a reason to delete a COA since most of the COA's uploaded at Wikimedia Commons meet those two criteria. Natuur12 (talk) 16:26, 9 January 2016 (UTC)
Thanks! Ellin Beltz (talk) 22:12, 9 January 2016 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Chevrolet Captiva.jpgEdit

Hi Natuur12, please could you explain the decision in this case in more detail? Take a look in the history: I mad two days before the decision to keep the file, because of no deletion rationale, no specified redundant image name as a replacement was given by User:OSX. OSX reverted this (i didn't noticed this) and one day later you delete this file. Maybe you overlook this? As far as i can see, File:Chevrolet_Captiva.jpg is not a low quality image and there is no obvious reason to delete it.--Wdwd (talk) 19:25, 9 January 2016 (UTC)

Hi, well that is a dirty trick he used. I didn't noticed that he reverted your closing and I restored the file. Normally I don't check stuff like the history of the nomination page since it would be an impossible job to do for every DR. The file was deleted because we have many better quality images about this specific model but you do have a point, there was no real urge for this DR and it is a bit annoying that people flood the DR pages with DR's like this. The DR you mentioned is not the only DR he reverted. I also found this, this and this DR. I will restore those files as well but I am not sure how to proceed since there have to be some consequences for this kind of behaviour. I also found this case which also includes problematic reverts. I will make a post at com:AN/U regarding this user. Natuur12 (talk) 20:10, 9 January 2016 (UTC)
Sometimes his DNs are for his own photos... he took lesser quality ones before, and is replacing them with better images. Those DNs I can support. I'm not at all in support of him reversing Wdwd's closures. I don't see any other recent reversions. Cheers! Ellin Beltz (talk) 22:11, 9 January 2016 (UTC)
thank you, Natuur12. A note on COM:AN/U seems appropriate.--Wdwd (talk) 22:16, 9 January 2016 (UTC)

"kerembarut"Edit

Maslak kerembarut.jpg

Hi, "kerembarut" has no meaning; therefore the name ("Maslak kerembarut") of the image I requested to be renamed ("File:Maslak kerembarut.jpg) has no meaning, either. "To change from a meaningless or ambiguous name to a name that describes what the image displays" complies with "Maslak skyline" does it not? --E4024 (talk) 16:01, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

Kerem Barut is the name of the uploader. Sorry but this new name is only slightly better and the old one isn't completely meaningless. Natuur12 (talk) 16:08, 13 January 2016 (UTC)
I have asked for many moves and it is the first time something like this happens to me in Commons. I guess that means something is really meaningless here. --E4024 (talk) 16:15, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

Nel BenschopEdit

Hej Natuur, kan jij effe naar iets kijken voor me? Collega Cees Boede heeft recent een massa bestanden geüpload die volgens mij allemaal een auteursrechtenschending van Nel Benschop inhouden (zie ook hier). Benschop overleed in 2005, dus haar werken bevinden zich nog niet in het publieke domein. Boede is dan wel zelf de auteursrechtenhouder van de muziek, maar ook daarvoor ontbreekt de benodigde toestemming. Ik heb niet veel zin om alle bestanden stuk per stuk te gaan nomineren, dus ik zou het fijn vinden als jij er even naar kan kijken. EvilFreD overleg 08:51, 14 January 2016 (UTC)

Zie Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Cees Boede. Er zal of een verdraaid goede verklaring gegeven moeten worden hoe Cees Boede de rechthebbende van de tekst is geworden of familie van Nel Benschop dient een verklaring op te sturen naar OTRS. (De identiteit van Boede moet ook gevalideerd worden via OTRS natuurlijk). Natuur12 (talk) 09:28, 14 January 2016 (UTC)

Voor de goede orde : ik ben niet de zoveelste pleegzoon van Nel Benschop maar uit de Afbeelding Nel Benschop blijkt haar persoonlijke waardering voor het geschreven. Ik wil die nog wel een keer uploaden maar word een beetje moe van dit wetenschap bedrijven...— Preceding unsigned comment added by Cees Boede (talk • contribs)

Beste Cees Boede,
Ik snap dat het vervelend is maar we zullen toch een aantal verklaringen nodig hebben omtrent de rechten van deze werken. Anders kunnen we niet zeker weten of we deze bestanden wel mogen hosten onder een vrije licentie. Weet u misschien wie de rechten van de tekst geërfd hebben? Het is altijd wat lastig uitzoeken wie nu precies de rechthebbende van een werk is geworden na het overlijden van de auteur. Natuur12 (talk) 09:47, 14 January 2016 (UTC)

Follow-Up/ Orangelbex67Edit

Hi,

I just sent an email to your OTRS-team and received the following Ticket#: 2016011410020152. The photo is a "profile" photo, a white/brown-spotted dress with a blue office background. I just added another image--Arizona State University grants permission for the use of this photo

Business-Classroom

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Professor_Adriana_Sanford.jpg

Again, I am not sure of what step I am be missing to show permission. I requested another ticket number as it is a separate issue---Ticket#: 2016011410021115.

Would you be able to walk me through this process?


Thank you!

Dear Orangelbex67

Someone from the Arizona Board of Regents who is authorised to license their intelectual property needs to send the declaration listed at Commons:Email templates/Consent to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org so we can validate that they agree with licensing the photograph. I undeleted the file mentioned in the OTRS-ticket. Natuur12 (talk) 17:04, 14 January 2016 (UTC)

Ok Thank you. I will send this to ASU and ask that they make the request. I just uploaded another image taken by a friend. I will make the same request.

Great. If you provide me with the ticket numbers after they mailed OTRS I will look into those mails as quickly as I can. Natuur12 (talk) 19:28, 14 January 2016 (UTC)
Dear Natuur12

I just received the ticket number that Arizona State University received after they submitted their release and the image. Is it possible for you to undelete? Ticket#: 2016012510014041/File:Professor_Adriana_Sanford.jpg The second image was provided directly from PBS to permissions commons and PBS received the following Ticket #2016012410010528. Would you be able to assist in uploading these images to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adriana_Sanford Please advise. Thank you679699sof (talk) 20:20, 25 January 2016 (UTC)

CopyrightEdit

Hi, I saw you delete this file, it's made by the author, and he wants to upload with cc-sa, how can he upload it?--Martinligabue (talk) 16:24, 15 January 2016 (UTC)

Dear Martinligabue,
The file has been published elswhere before being uploaded to Wikimedia Commons. The copyright holder needs to send in a statement to our OTRS-team using an email we can use to validate this persons identity. Natuur12 (talk) 16:31, 15 January 2016 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Media without a license as of 13 December 2015Edit

Hi,

you forgot to delete two images after closing the deletion request:

--Regasterios (talk) 13:41, 16 January 2016 (UTC)

    • Thanks for the message. Deleted them. Natuur12 (talk) 15:28, 16 January 2016 (UTC)

unnecessary moves with hundred of linkfixesEdit

Hello Natuur12, what do you think about this unnecessary move? I had declined that already. It's just another language and nearly a hundred articles in different wikis shall be renamed to that new name now (I've pointed to this while declining the move, see here). I'm seeing now that it's still waiting on User:CommonsDelinker/commands/filemovers that all those nearly 100 linkfixes in all those Wikipedia articles will be done. Wouldn't it be better to move the file back and protect it from moving, so that there are not so many unnecessary moves and linkfixes are being made for every move of the file? I saw that you have blocked that user already because of that. What do you think about it? Or doesn't it matter in any way, if a file is moved all the times and a hundred of articles have linkfixes for every unnecessary move? Can a file also be moved, if thousands of articles use it or is there any limit? I didn't find a rule for those cases. Are there files that get protected from moving, if there are too many articles using it? Regards --Bjarlin (talk) 11:03, 17 January 2016 (UTC)

Pinging @Ymblanter who moves replacements to User:CommonsDelinker/commands. Do you also take a look at high numbres of replacements and if those many linkfixes really are needed? --Bjarlin (talk) 11:07, 17 January 2016 (UTC)

Pinging involved users: @Kwasura, PsichoPuzo, Armbrust, Wieralee: Poké95 11:22, 17 January 2016 (UTC)
As a filemover, I Symbol keep vote.svg agree with Bjarlin. Before moving a file with nearly 100 filelinks in all Wikimedia wikis, it should be thinked carefully. Just because it is "file renaming criterion 1" (Original uploader's request), it means it should be moved. Also, moving/renaming a file in another language is controversial and must be discussed. It seems the old name (Standard of the Ukrainian Defense Minister) is already fine and is the most meaningful name for me. Poké95 11:29, 17 January 2016 (UTC)
Pictogram voting info.svg Info @Bjarlin: Unfortunately, -revi moved all requests from User:CommonsDelinker/commands/filemovers to User:CommonsDelinker/commands, which also includes the unnecessary move. -- Poké95 11:44, 17 January 2016 (UTC)
Can that not be reverted? What a mess. --Bjarlin (talk) 11:46, 17 January 2016 (UTC)
Yes, sure, it can be reverted.--Ymblanter (talk) 11:50, 17 January 2016 (UTC)
I don't see any other way to stop the bot than blocking it globally for a while and take the request out of the bot's to-do list. If the file is moved again, the bot gets a second request and moves all the links and back again, then there are 200 linkfixes instead of 100. Or how should this get reverted, when the bot already has begun to fix all requests? --Bjarlin (talk) 12:27, 17 January 2016 (UTC)
I also think that this new name is fine. The original one had been File:Shtandard MOD UA.png which can be argued to move because of the spelling (which seems to be a transcription of the cyrillic name). But one move should be enough, now there are two already. So declining the move has been counterproductive and lead to two moves instead of one. If the second move will be revoked before linkfixes will be done, that would be better. It can be discussed further, but the lots of linkfixes should not be done before a discussion. I also don't see any need that all the English and other articles with Latin letters now shall get a Cyrillic name. Then it would be better to upload the file once more under another name in such a case, so that it can be used with Latin and Cyrillic letters and not only with Cyrillic ones. That would be a better compromise than moving it here and there with all the linkfixes every time. I would prefer uploading it twice instead of moving it, but that hasn't been discussed yet. --Bjarlin (talk) 11:46, 17 January 2016 (UTC)
I announced several days ago that I stopped doing Delinker replacements for some time. The main reason is that users continue to make bad moves (in particular, Latin-only to Cyrillic-only names) even after warnings, and I do not have the energy to move everything back and to argue with them. I would be happy if someone else can take the lead. I expect not to be back on this task in at least a month.--Ymblanter (talk) 11:48, 17 January 2016 (UTC)
@Magnus Manske: Can you cancel the universal replace of File:Standard of the Ukrainian Defense Minister.png to File:Штандарт МОУ.png? Thanks, Poké95 11:56, 17 January 2016 (UTC)
Resolution is simple: move it back and it will appear on CDC's queue again. — regards, Revi 12:15, 17 January 2016 (UTC)
I think that everything will then be moved twiced instead of once and the linkfixes will double from 100 to 200. Isn't that the case? The bot has it already in its to-do list now and I don't see, how it could be stopped without blocking it globally.
By the way: Is it possible for filemovers to remove such requests from User:CommonsDelinker/commands/filemovers, so that this doesn't happen again? There shouldn't been moved such requests that are in ongoing discussion. I think that's quite strange. It seems to me that those moves with so many fixes doesn't matter at all to many people, otherwise such things wouldn't happen. What happens, if a file has thousands of linkfixes and is moved? I'm wondering, if there is any limit for moving widely used files from one language to another (or any other similar unnecessary move of such files)? --Bjarlin (talk) 12:22, 17 January 2016 (UTC)

I don’t know how to fix any of the technical aspect but it is really troublesome that this user reverted so many file renames and admins who declined his requests. Policy does allow users to rename files just because the uploader requests it but the request has to be reasonable. As a courtesy, nothing more. When the file is widely used such a request isn’t reasonable. I honoured a couple of requests myself when the files weren’t widely used and before I realised what this user is doing. Problem is that PsichoPuzo seems to have a problem with understanding English which makes him misinterpreting our policies causing this giant mess. I think we should have a general discussion regarding the naming of those files. Natuur12 (talk) 16:54, 17 January 2016 (UTC)

  • It is a little bit unfair to change the uploaders native language in his file names. It would be better if the file was protected after the first revert... Wieralee (talk) 17:34, 17 January 2016 (UTC)
@Wieralee: But the uploader requested to rename his file from English to his native language. That's unnecessary, potentially controversial, and waste of time for a bot. But yeah, it seems to be a little bit unfair to change it back to English... Both filenames are correct actually. But because it is potentially controversial, it needs to be discussed. Poké95 10:05, 18 January 2016 (UTC)

@Bjarlin: Thanks for bringing this to our attention. We appreciate it. We hope that together we will find a consensus about the names of the National military units and organizations here in Commons. My recent edits include Correction and proper categorization of the Ukrainian Air force shoulder sleeve insignia. These are brigade, regiment, branch, band, school insignia, etc. I hope everyone will agree, that there is nothing wrong about having the right name for something that have the name, there is nothing harmful, questionable or confusing, I suppose. The main question is: what pattern this names will have. i am seeing the Commons as serious storage space, and think that it will be only natural to have a unified pattern, as to prevent all possible conflicts in the future. If English is the only language supported by the Commons I, personalty, have no problems seeing all Ukrainian files be named in English as long as it is a unified pattern. If someone thinks differently i would love to hear his opinion. Sincerely, --Kwasura (talk) 18:17, 17 January 2016 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) User:Kwasura, the only rule for filename harmony is that there’s no filename harmony. There are guidelines for new filenames and, while it is not «anything goes», there’s no requirement for names of related files (like all images of traffic signs) to follow one coherent system. More importantly, there are guidelines for file renaming that are even more distant from a goal of filename harmony: Basicly it says that there should be no file renaming unless the current name is very bad — and then it lists what "bad" means: Not being harmonious with thousands of akin filenames is not a reason to delete rename​(corrected on 05:27, 23 January 2016 (UTC)) (except when such harmony is used by a template or some such, as, e.g., images of pages of the same book). This might be a bit of a shock (it was for me when I started in Commons, based on my experience with the very strict filename discipline of FotW), but try to adapt and focus on file content and curation, not on file naming. -- Tuválkin 19:07, 18 January 2016 (UTC)

File:Pog Collection.jpg deletionEdit

I just received the message that File:Pog Collection.jpg was deleted. Why was it deleted. Isn't there supposed to be a period where I could address the issue. The day the message was sent to me was the day it was deleted.--ZeWrestler (talk) 20:41, 19 January 2016 (UTC)

It was a Derivative of non free content. Flippo's are protected by copyright law. Natuur12 (talk) 20:37, 19 January 2016 (UTC)
I see, thank you for the quick reply --ZeWrestler (talk) 20:41, 19 January 2016 (UTC)

File:Salah-Abdeslam.jpgEdit

Hello,

could you help me achieve some clarity as to why this file was deleted, the links show the photograph is governmental, wouldn't this indicate it is free, similarly to Crown Copyrighted material? 6cb49af5c4 (talk) 12:04, 21 January 2016 (UTC)

could this be used? http://d.ibtimes.co.uk/en/full/1469589/abdeslam-salah-arrest-warrant.jpg (taken from http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/belgium-police-find-paris-attackers-bomb-factory-hideout-1536843) 6cb49af5c4 (talk) 12:27, 21 January 2016 (UTC)

Hi, no, the file is from a Belgium website which licensing conditions that don't comply with com:L. The other files you link would probably also fail com:L and com:PCP. (One could argue if an photograph like that is creative enough to warrant a copyright but that is hard to prove and there are not much sources regarding Belgium law available online to back up such a statement. Natuur12 (talk) 12:44, 21 January 2016 (UTC)

Kwasura and Latin to Cyrillic renamingsEdit

Greetings, would you be so kind to check this out and explain me what is it exactly did i do wrong? Sincerely, --Kwasura (talk) 03:33, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

Pogs.JPGEdit

On January 17 you removed my file Pogs.JPG. That image is a photograph I took of pogs I own. How can that possibly be a copyright violation? — Preceding unsigned comment added by NoTalkMan (talk • contribs) 01:46, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

Dear NoTalkMan,
The photograph is indeed your own work however, it is a photograph of a couple of flippo's. The designe of those flippo's is protected by copyright law which makes your image a derivative of non free content. Such files are not allowed per Commons policy. If you have any more questions feel free to ask them. Natuur12 (talk) 16:16, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Trigrams near cave entrance in Burro Flats.jpgEdit

Kindly un-close the deletion nomination: first you closed it with a vote for keeping, and then you enforced that supervote with a further vote. A trip to COM:ANU will follow if you ignore this message. Nyttend (talk) 04:45, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

  • @Nyttend: your actions are even more questionable [1], [2] Christian Ferrer (talk) 05:44, 23 January 2016 (UTC)
    • @Nyttend: yet again you are trying to get what you want by intimidating another admin. This behaviour isn't tolerated at Wikimedia Commons so please don't do it again. You seem to confuse Commons with the English Wikipedia again by trying to enforce their practices while we have practices of our own and one of them is that it is perfectly fine to close a DR as keep when the only comment comes from the nominator and the other one is that we don't renominate files without addressing new arguments and/or discussing the closing with the closing admin. Your expectations are a bit unreasonable especially since there are only ten admins at best who close DR’s at a regular basis and most of them keep unopposed DR’s every now and then. Sometimes with a clear motivation and sometimes with a really short statement as “no reason to delete” since it is obvious that the DR is invalid. If you want to change the way admins in general close DR’s feel free to start a general discussion so we can update our policy’s.
  • You really have to change your behaviour and forget about EN-wiki policy’s, practises etc and start learning ours. Especially forget about supervotes since this seems to be a term that is often abused by EN-wiki users when they disagree with an administrators decision. It would become a huge mess if we would start importing practises from the French, Dutch, German and Spanish Wikipedia for example just because one of our admins is also an admin at one of those projects. Furthermore, we have talk pages so please use them. Commons is about being mellow and building a respiratory of free media files. Not about having some catfight over a basic DR.
  • If you want to report me at com:AN/U go ahead. You will only make a fool out of yourself. I did nothing wrong, (at best one could argue that I shouldn't close the same DR twice but even this is not uncommon) however, you clearly violated our rollback policy. Natuur12 (talk) 16:13, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

Request File Adi67.jpg be Undeleted/ Permission granted by Public Broadcasting Service (PBS) /Ticket #2016012410010528Edit

Dear Natuur12

I was informed by PBS that they emailed permissions-commons. PBS has granted the use of Adi67.jpg in the following site: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adriana_Sanford Could you please undelete this image or advise me on who can assist with this process. I was told to contact you--the ticket number is #2016012410010528. Thank you.679699sof (talk) 23:11, 25 January 2016 (UTC)

Dear 679699sof,
It seems that someone else already took care of the ticket. Natuur12 (talk) 17:12, 27 January 2016 (UTC)

File:Test video upload.webmEdit

Don't forget to rename this file (and one subtitles page) Thanks for testing :) --Zhuyifei1999 (talk) 14:46, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for creating this great tool :). Now I can finally upload YT-vids without getting annoyed. Renamed it. Natuur12 (talk) 14:49, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

Translation needed:Edit

Hi! Could you please translate this watchlist notice into NL? Thanks in advance! --Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 03:43, 3 February 2016 (UTC)

[[Commons:Photo challenge]]''': Time to vote for [[Commons:Photo challenge/2016 - January - Diagonals/Voting|'''Diagonals''' (January)]] and [[Commons:Photo challenge/2016 - January - Wheels/Voting|'''Wheels''' (January)]]. Submit your entries for [[Commons:Photo challenge/2016 - February - Mailboxes|'''Mailboxes''' (February)]] and [[Commons:Photo challenge/2016 - February - Reflections|'''Reflections''' (February)]]

Hi Hedwig,
I would love too but I don't know how I can update it myself. Here is a Dutch translation:

[[Commons:Photo challenge|Fotowedstrijd]]''': Het is tijd om te stemmen voor de categorieën [[Commons:Photo challenge/2016 - January - Diagonals/Voting|'''Diagonalen''' (januari)]] en [[Commons:Photo challenge/2016 - January - Wheels/Voting|'''Wielen''' ((januari)]]. Ook kunt meedoen in de categorieën [[Commons:Photo challenge/2016 - February - Mailboxes|'''Brievenbussen''' (februari)]] en [[Commons:Photo challenge/2016 - February - Reflections|'''Reflecties''' (februari)]]

I did change the wording a bit since it would be a gramatical disaster otherwise. Natuur12 (talk) 15:43, 4 February 2016 (UTC)

FamiliealbumEdit

Ha Natuur12, zou je hier even naar willen kijken [3]. Ik weet niet precies waar het onder te schuiven, maar om hier een familiealbum neer te zetten lijkt me ook niet de bedoeling. mvg Agora (talk) 11:25, 3 February 2016 (UTC)

Beste Agora,
Dat is inderdaad niet de bedoeling. Zie Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by HansDesmet1970. Natuur12 (talk) 15:46, 4 February 2016 (UTC)

Orientation of Bombay Reef imageEdit

Hello. Thank you for your work on File:Bombay Reef 1.JPG today. I was wondering if it would be appropriate to rotate File:BombayReef.jpg so that it has the correct orientation for north-up. You can see the correct orientation in satellite view if you look on Bing Maps. I guess if this was appropriate, I should upload it as a new file name, such as File:BombayReef(NorthUp).jpg and then relink it on the various wikipedia pages that use the photo. Thanks in advance for any advice you can offer. --Strolls (talk) 12:54, 5 February 2016 (UTC)

Hi, just to be on the safe side it is probably best to upload it under a new file name but I have to admit that I am not an expert on this subject so someone more experienced in this area might give you other advice. Natuur12 (talk) 19:51, 5 February 2016 (UTC)
Many thanks for your reply. I'll have to see if there's a wikimedia help portal. --Strolls (talk) 13:22, 6 February 2016 (UTC)

HalloEdit

Can i upload this foto to commons? --RašoAero-stub img.svg 17:54, 5 February 2016 (UTC)

Hi,
I am afraid not. The cc-icon at the file page indicates that this file is releaced under a non commercial license. Natuur12 (talk) 19:52, 5 February 2016 (UTC)
I thought so. Thanks anyway--RašoAero-stub img.svg 21:38, 5 February 2016 (UTC)
Return to the user page of "Natuur12".